San Francisco Zoo Employees Shocked Over Alleged Spying Scandal

[bryan_herbert]

SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- San Francisco Zoo employees have come forward to say they are shocked to learn that the radios they are required to wear have allegedly been used for spying by management.

Union reps for San Francisco Zoo say radios used to spy on employees | abc7news.com

 

[mmckenna]

This function is sometimes used by police departments, often in emergencies if the officer can't key their own radio. Some "emergency" functions will hot key the mic.
Triggering it manually is an option, and as the "keepers" said, it isn't necessarily noticeable by the radio user. This isn't some new fancy function, it's been available for a long time.

 

[MTS2000des]

So what if management uses remote monitor? These employees are whining infants. When you are on your employer's property using their equipment, they have every right to monitor what you do.

If you are doing your job, you have nothing to worry about, right?

If they are that worried about it, they just implemented the Streisand Effect. Now they've just called themselves out even more.

Hey San Fran zoo employees, if you think management was listening before, REST ASSURED they are listening and watching you now.

 

[KCoax]

The news story specifically states that two radios were programmed to monitor this function. Even if they don't have a main dispatch center that is rather creepy. Nice if one is attacked by a tiger, still creepy.

 

[bravo14]

They say they got a new system and notice it might be DMR Trunked. According to the FCC site WQTZ796

 

[MTS2000des]

Even if they don't have a main dispatch center that is rather creepy. Nice if one is attacked by a tiger, still creepy.

No more or less creepy than a business putting up a camera system, or monitoring company issued cellphone calls, company emails or internet use on company owned computers.

It's really a non-issue to me. When you work for someone else and are on THEIR property, they can watch everything you do. It's called accountability.

If one does not like it, don't work there.

The news story specifically states that two radios were programmed to monitor this function.

From the story the radios the front line carry appear to be non-keypad/display models. Makes perfect sense only supervisors/managers/brass would have display radios with such features enabled.

Still fail to see what the big deal here is.

 

[hfxChris]

So what if management uses remote monitor? These employees are whining infants. When you are on your employer's property using their equipment, they have every right to monitor what you do.

If you are doing your job, you have nothing to worry about, right?

If the employees weren't told that the radios they were issued may be used to monitor them, then that's a problem.

And, as the article suggests, if management was laughing about what they were hearing, then that indicates a lack of professionalism on their part.

There's quite a few problems here..

 

[SCPD]

Regardless anyone Will laugh in any work environment. Remote monitoring isn't new. Matter fact I know a government entity where most stopped carrying because they felt they'd be spied on but in reality they were only made aware of it when newer radios were issued. They got told it was for only if safety issues arose and the dispatch would do it but only under certain conditions. Most went to private cell phones but it'll prob change As its hassle. Big deal. If anything remote monitoring ensures government worker and public safety, safety. Also accountability. I don't see problem. Being in a zoo and liable to be attacked by animals it would come in handy for help to come. The zoo by me they dont care they can be. They already work in a place where the public has eyes on them and cameras. So what's the difference? I assume some took the radios home? They shouldn't have and if they did they know it's the departments radio and they can remote monitor. Everyone has laughs I don't care who you are. They should be glad they don't have to have lapel cameras yet as allot of municipal entities are requiring there employees to wear them now while working. I think what it boils down to is crap talk on job and taking it easy and there afraid of reprocussions. Accounted for time. Basically the union is sticking up for the crap talk of supervisors and loafing time. I don't see problem. This capability has been around for a very long time. If anything they should be glad the supervisors have a sense of humor and that's all they do. It's just speculation though it seems. Granted there will be denial. Why not just turn it off when using the bathroom or on break? Radio in 10-10 or off air for whatever reason and turn it back on. In public service it isn't a private job. Your working on tax payer money and accountability has become a big issue these days. I don't see remote monitoring as a problem. none less union business/talk is not authorized during work hours no? If they work and dont loaf what are they worried about? I don't see issue. So what if they had 2 zoo keepers in need of help and remote monitor was not used? The union would sue then I'm sure. WA wa wa. I never had problem with remote monitoring. I agree with mts2000des. Your on work time. I think what happened is the whistle blower assumed when told these can be remote monitored. Of course there is no indication. In a situation most radios are made in public safety ideas where you don't want a suspect or nut knowing help is coming to the fire, emt, or officer. Remote monitor comes in handy when A radio is stolen also.

 

[N9NRA]

This function is sometimes used by police departments, often in emergencies if the officer can't key their own radio. Some "emergency" functions will hot key the mic.
Triggering it manually is an option, and as the "keepers" said, it isn't necessarily noticeable by the radio user. This isn't some new fancy function, it's been available for a long time.

And i know of at least one ham radio that can do that (kinda, you must start the function manually, it cannot be remotely done AFIK, i may be wrong though), i believe the unit is a Yeasu one, but again, i may be wrong . Anyway, these folks need to live with it, as i found out while working at a local distribution center (warehouse), when you`re on their property, they more-or-less own you till ya leave at the end of your shift...and in some extreme cases they do AFTER you`re shift is over too (they can sometimes see what you do on your Facebook account for example). N9NRA

 

[MTS2000des]

If the employees weren't told that the radios they were issued may be used to monitor them, then that's a problem.

Not necessarily. When you take a job most anywhere, you already consent to your activities being monitored and or recorded by your employer. Especially municipal employees. As a citizen, I welcome this. Accountability is how we ensure our money is not squandered and we are getting what we pay for. It also ensures that employees are doing their jobs and not slacking on the job. It ensures worker safety which means fewer accidents which means fewer workers' comp claims paid out. Win-win situation.

Anyone who is honorable and does what they are supposed to will have no problem with such monitoring. Where I work, everything I do is on camera, every keystroke on my workstation is logged, and every phone call and radio call is recorded. It doesn't have any other effect on me other than serve as a CYA in the small chance there is a complaint, and those recordings and logs only serve to back up my version of what happened.

People tell lies. Recordings do not.

And, as the article suggests, if management was laughing about what they were hearing, then that indicates a lack of professionalism on their part.

Maybe, but this is a personnel issue and I am sure the employees can file a grievance. But it doesn't mean that management should not be using such tools to monitor their employees activities.

They are unionized, so there may be contract wording I am not aware of, but at the end of the day, the issue over the monitoring of the zoo's employees is really moot.

 

[mmckenna]

"The San Francisco zookeepers union representative said a whistleblower in management told them other managers were eavesdropping on employees and laughing about it. "

Union, there ya' go. If it wasn't this, they'd find something else to whine about.

 

[KCoax]

Expectation of privacy.Just because it is private property isn't much of an argument. I highly doubt the employees were told their radios could monitor them without their knowledge. Municipalities and corporations have set up those contracts because of rather substantial "Expectation of Privacy" law suits. Agree with them or not, that is the reason. I doubt the employees were "agree too" for this feature. Personally, I think the feature is a good idea for people working with lions and tigers. Hell, one tiger there killed a guy for taking a cell phone picture. As stated in the story some employees were not notified. California. Obviously, there is going to be a law suit. I'm wondering are reps selling this as radio feature? Anyone caught this feature being used in SDR?

 

[MTS2000des]

Expectation of privacy.Just because it is private property isn't much of an argument.

When you work for someone else, you give up an expectation of privacy. Employees cars and purses are subject to search. You consent to this when you are offered a job. Don't agree? Don't work there. Good luck finding gainful employment in a modern workplace where you aren't subject to such rules.

I highly doubt the employees were told their radios could monitor them without their knowledge.

They don't have to. Any reasonable person can deduce that a two way communication device can be monitored without your immediate knowledge or intervention. Every cellphone company in America does it, have you read your terms of service with your provider? Again, you consented to it by signing up for service on their network. Don't like it? Don't use their services.

Municipalities and corporations have set up those contracts because of rather substantial "Expectation of Privacy" law suits. Agree with them or not, that is the reason.

Depends, have you seen the contracts? Can you cite the actual wording? I am sure the lawyers outweigh the benefits versus the risk. As far as lawsuits, anyone can sue anyone for anything, doesn't mean they will win nor does it mean they have a case either.

I doubt the employees were "agree too" for this feature.

I am sure they would not agree to many things where they are monitored, that's why union workers get away with more incompetence and theft than non union shops. But that does not make what the management was doing illegal per se. Been to a US Post office lately? Boy I bet a lot more packages wouldn't go missing and be delivered on time, if they monitored their employees more closely, for "quality and training purposes" of course.

. Personally, I think the feature is a good idea for people working with lions and tigers. Hell, one tiger there killed a guy for taking a cell phone picture.

Yep, it's a great feature and one that is designed to keep workers safe, as is the Lone Worker feature which is available on MotoTRBO and many analog conventional radios from Motorola and others like Icom, Kenwood and Vertex-Standard which will sound an alarm if a user doesn't respond to a radio check. Combined with GPS tracking, it could save someone's life.

As stated in the story some employees were not notified. California. Obviously, there is going to be a law suit.

Probably but if there is anything that comes out of it, who knows. I hope the management does not back off from using such features. A policy change maybe, specifying that monitoring be done only for "official" purposes and not for personal amusement. We shall see what develops.

I'm wondering are reps selling this as radio feature?

If not then they should be! It's a great selling point and something that will sell more full feature radios versus basic radios for supervisors and managers in an organization.

 

[Thunderknight]

Where I work, everything I do is on camera, every keystroke on my workstation is logged, and every phone call and radio call is recorded.

Does that include in the bathroom? The zookeeper quoted in the article said they bring the radios everywhere, including into the bathroom.

Recording audio or video in a bathroom appears prohibited in California (see page 3 of this PDF)
http://www.shrm.org/legalissues/sta...ts/state surveillance and monitoring laws.pdf
I guess a court would have to decide if live open-mic monitoring constituted recording.

The zookeeper quoted also said they bring them on breaks. Does the employer's right to monitor continue on breaks? What if they are unpaid breaks? (I don't know if they were or weren't)

I don't know how valid the source is, but look at the 2nd paragraph under "Audio Monitoring" in this link.
http://www.americanbar.org/publicat...9/may_2013_n2_privacy/employment_privacy.html

When you work for someone else, you give up an expectation of privacy. Employees cars and purses are subject to search. You consent to this when you are offered a job.

I would suspect that varies by state.

 

[Kitn1mcc]

if they are worried when there in the rest room or on break. turn it off and remove the battery. issue solved

 

[WQPW689]

Privacy

As usual, there's been a fair amount of bluster in this thread about expectation (or not) of privacy in employment.

Universal recording, either audio or visual, has it's limits both in government and the private sector. I invite any entity to decide they have the right to start audio/videotaping showers and locker rooms in the workplace without some sort of prior agreement/collective bargaining agreement/and even State or Federal laws in place and see what happens. Jail time comes to mind amongst other things.

As has been most sensibly pointed out, individual State laws, collective bargaining agreements and common sense will show the way here.

Not everyone in this country is a public safety dispatcher who's 100% recorded all day, all the time.

 

[MTS2000des]

Does that include in the bathroom? The zookeeper quoted in the article said they bring the radios everywhere, including into the bathroom.

I would say this is a gray area, but OTOH, if they fail to respond to a call and their supervisor sends a call to open up a mike to check on them, so long as the intent was to ensure the employee's welfare, how is that any different than them walking across the zoo and making entry?

If anything it's all in how they articulate their use of the feature. If they have a policy in place which stipulates it can only be used for safety of life or health situations, doing a radio check/open mike after someone fails to respond to a welfare check, then then management is using due diligence to ensure their employee's safety. If a policy is in place to ensure compliance with policies, procedures, etc and it is utilized for that purpose, that is another scenario as well.

I guess a court would have to decide if live open-mic monitoring constituted recording.

Monitoring without recording may fall under electronic eavesdropping statutes but it is clearly not recording.

The zookeeper quoted also said they bring them on breaks. Does the employer's right to monitor continue on breaks? What if they are unpaid breaks? (I don't know if they were or weren't)

No different than anyone who takes a break, but still on company property. If they are on company property, they are still liable for what happens to that employee, on break or not. So, it depends, if their open mike checks were for official purposes to ensure the safety of the employee or to ensure compliance with company policies they have that right in most cases.

Again, it all depends on what policy is in place and how the use of said feature is articulated and documented.

Universal recording, either audio or visual, has it's limits both in government and the private sector.

We aren't talking about recording. We are talking about an open live microphone.

I invite any entity to decide they have the right to start audio/videotaping showers and locker rooms in the workplace without some sort of prior agreement/collective bargaining agreement/and even State or Federal laws in place and see what happens.

Again, nothing in this incident involves recording, unless I misunderstood the report. So all your mantra about unauthorized recording doesn't apply in the situation at hand.

As has been most sensibly pointed out, individual State laws, collective bargaining agreements and common sense will show the way here.

And what will come out, or should, is a policy that should be implemented that dictates when supervisors/management can use such a remote monitor feature. I would think it should only be utilized for life safety situations where an employee does not respond after a call, or there is articulable suspicion of a safety concern, or to ensure compliance with employer policy. If they cannot articulate that during use, then it could constitute abuse. It should also be documented.

But this is something that they will have to iron out. I am sure they will.

Not everyone in this country is a public safety dispatcher who's 100% recorded all day, all the time.

No, but in this day and age, one has to understand that when you work for someone else, they can and will watch what you do. Does that mean they should have a camera on you when you are taking a dump? No. But if you say you are going to the can and don't come out, is it not reasonable to use what technology now allows to make sure you are okay?

It's all in how they articulate and dictate the use of the technology. For the employees to act surprised that they can be monitored through a two way radio is amazing to me.

 

[SCPD]

At this point it is a speculation any remote monitoring was done. If it goes to court the whistle blower will have to be deposed and exposed. Hear say so far is all they are going by. Is there any logs etc Of the equipment? If not I don't see it going anywhere.

Not to get off topic but I'd like to wonder how private these folks are and if they have social media like twitter facebook, snapchat, tumblr, etc. It defeats I want privacy if one has this stuff.

 

[MTS2000des]

At this point it is a speculation any remote monitoring was done. If it goes to court the whistle blower will have to be deposed and exposed. Hear say so far is all they are going by.

Yep, you got a good point. It's all he said/she said. Without any actual proof there isn't much.

One thing is for sure, that those employees who have made noise will now be put under a microscope.

Is there any logs etc Of the equipment? If not I don't see it going anywhere.

There might be if someone checks the logs in the RDAC. Or there could be more detailed records if the system has a third party application like GW3-TRBO running.

Not to get off topic but I'd like to wonder how private these folks are and if they have social media like twitter facebook, snapchat, tumblr, etc. It defeats I want privacy if one has this stuff.

I think that is very relevant actually. And you can rest assured if anything does go to court, anything those accusers say on social media can and will be used against them. :wink:

 

[KG7PBS]

I worked for a Casino in Sparks NV; that did this on are radios when we had some in the Holding Room whiting on the police to arrive. they did it to see and record what the Suspect and we said it was nice we had the same XPR7350 in UHF i loved that radio.